The new Corona virus, should we worry?

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
14,689
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
You’re contradicting yourself. You say people have been doing nothing this whole time, then say people adjusted their behaviors. Which is it?

All the evidence points to people not consistently doing those things but I know you’re not someone that uses evidence to come to your conclusions.
They followed the directions set forth in March. AS the bullshit piled high, people did adjust their behaviors and that was later in the fall 2020. For many months, people followed the "rules", for the most part.

The evidence surely does point to exactly what I am saying. Flatten the curve, correct? Curve flattened. AS time went on, a surge. As people adjusted their behaviors. MOST people went for many months following the GII "rules".

My own eyes tell the story.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
14,689
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
There’s very little scientific evidence around masks. In fact, I just heard of a study that thinks the kinds of masks people wear turn droplets into aerosol and make spread HIGHER with masks.
the narrative from the left is that masks obviously work, and people are too selfish to wear them. That narrative has a lot of holes.
Bingo.

GII position in this thread to a T.

Masking is a virtuous endeavor, and anyone willing to not believe the rubbish is in GII dog house.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,615
Reaction score
4,239
Points
113
I have to ask, so it's not reasonable to expect at-risk people to take some responsibility for themselves and their own health but it IS reasonable to force mask mandates and a litany of other requirements on the entire population of the country?

Some people need to take a step back and take a look at this from 30,000 feet and see what's really going on here

CONS: It's highly important that we prioritize the economy during the pandemic
ALSO CONS: It would have worked great if only the 70% of the public that is overweight hadn't left their homes for the last 15 months.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
23,497
Reaction score
5,609
Points
113
Also Also Cons: it really pisses me off when people who weren't born into a lucky situation like I was choose to do things that then require my money to be stolen away from me as taxes to support these losers, or requires me to sacrifice me enjoying my life. Bahhh!!
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
52,976
Reaction score
10,482
Points
113
CONS: It's highly important that we prioritize the economy during the pandemic
ALSO CONS: It would have worked great if only the 70% of the public that is overweight hadn't left their homes for the last 15 months.
Rest assured, none of the Trumpster Fellas are in that 70%.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,728
Reaction score
2,387
Points
113
hospitalizations and ICU patients go up again.

MN Covid-19 Update - Thurs, April 1

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive cases 491,554 +1,726. Including probable cases 521,667.

Positive test rate 5.0%.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 39,295 +69.

Cases no longer needing isolation 500,351 +956.

Active cases 14,456 +1,170.

Deaths 6,483 +10. Including probable deaths 6,860.

deaths at long-term care and assisted living 4,045 +3. Including probable cases 4,280.

Patients currently Hospitalized 435 +24. Cumulative 27,404 +96.

Patients currently In ICU 105 +3. Cumulative 5,635 +12.

Total PCR tests processed 7,713,585 +34,767. Including antigen tests 8,253,622.

 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
CONS: It's highly important that we prioritize the economy during the pandemic
ALSO CONS: It would have worked great if only the 70% of the public that is overweight hadn't left their homes for the last 15 months.
Wrong. It’s important that the cure is not worse than the disease. Dozens of times progs have pushed this “greed” angle. Dozens of times we’ve had to correct you that businesses destroyed, kids out of school and trapped in abusive families, fear, drug abuse, loneliness, suicide, elderly isolation, and just plain everyone stopping their lives and not celebrating, mourning, etc all has a HUGE cost.
Also cons: BMI is bogus. I had a BMI turn up overweight because their waist measurement was 6 inches bigger than the waist I wear in pants. But yes, obesity is an epidemic. It’s controllable. And it’s a major risk factor for all sorts of chronic disease including covid. Shutting down the country with all the above costs to protect people with a controllable health condition is just wrong.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,725
Reaction score
1,924
Points
113
How silly can a, supposedly intelligent, person be???? All these people chose to be obese??

America's obesity problem is genetics and companies pushing awful, cheap food for decades.

How does Walz feel about corn subsidies. Maybe we should tax corn like cigarettes? 🤔🤷‍♂️
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,615
Reaction score
4,239
Points
113
Wrong. It’s important that the cure is not worse than the disease. Dozens of times progs have pushed this “greed” angle. Dozens of times we’ve had to correct you that businesses destroyed, kids out of school and trapped in abusive families, fear, drug abuse, loneliness, suicide, elderly isolation, and just plain everyone stopping their lives and not celebrating, mourning, etc all has a HUGE cost.
Also cons: BMI is bogus. I had a BMI turn up overweight because their waist measurement was 6 inches bigger than the waist I wear in pants. But yes, obesity is an epidemic. It’s controllable. And it’s a major risk factor for all sorts of chronic disease including covid. Shutting down the country with all the above costs to protect people with a controllable health condition is just wrong.
CONS: Most of America is obese and that's the REAL problem!
ALSO CONS: BMI is a garbage stat and most people are not obese!
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,371
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
Yes you can. Stricter lockdown on high risk population and use of N95 masks. What jobs require close contact?
Virtually every one that can’t be done from home requires close contact with co-workers and/or customers and clients. So for the higher risk people (50+% of the population) to minimize their risk, they’d have to stay home, not work and not help the economy in any way.
This is what maddens me. We can cancel ALL jobs to protect the small subset that are truly at risk
We’ve never come close to canceling all jobs even during the initial lockdown. I’ve argued against completely closing restaurants, gyms, schools etc since the first wave. Places like CA went overboard for too long.

Once again though, it’s not a small subset of people. A small group gets very sick but we can’t pinpoint exactly who’s going to get very sick or die. Two people that are the same age and have similar health may have two different reactions to the virus. The group of people with a greater chance of getting very sick or dying is pretty large and represents a big percentage of the working population.
but we can’t limit high risk folks from close contact with others? What sense does that make?
We can but it would mean a very large percentage of people to stop working because, again, that’s a lot of people.
There are no precautions high risk folks can take to limit their exposure? Of course there are. Wear a shield and N95. Wash hands frequently.
Of course that helps but if others around them aren’t doing the same things, then it won’t be as successful. You can decrease your chances of getting in a car accident by doing the right things but if everyone around is driving recklessly your chances of getting in an accident is still elevated.
Again, clearly communicate who is at risk, and how to protect yourself. And clearly communicate who isn’t high risk, and should only quarantine if feeling sick. The same way we handle every other pandemic in history.
History has shown that it takes everyone to tackle a pandemic. There’s evidence of it now. Sweden and others that tried the approach you’re talking about have failed. The places that have been most successful have had a very large portion of their population doing their part.
 
Last edited:

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
Virtually every one that can’t be done from home requires close contact with co-workers and/or customers and clients. So for the higher risk people (50+% of the population) to minimize their risk, they’d have to stay home, not work and not help the economy in any way.

We’ve never come close to canceling all jobs even during the initial lockdown. I’ve argued against completely closing restaurants, gyms, schools etc since the first wave. Places like CA went overboard for too long.

Once again though, it’s not a small subset of people. A small group gets very sick but we can’t pinpoint exactly who’s going to get very sick or die. Two people that are the same age and have similar health may have two different reactions to the virus. The group of people with a greater chance of getting very sick or dying is pretty large and represents a big percentage of the working population.

We can but it would mean a very large percentage of people to stop working because, again, that’s a lot of people.

Of course that helps but if others around them aren’t doing the same things, then it won’t be as successful. You can decrease your chances of getting in a car accident by doing the right things but if everyone around is driving recklessly your chances of getting in an accident is still elevated.

History has shown that it takes everyone to tackle a pandemic. There’s evidence of it now. Sweden and others that tried the approach you’re talking about have failed. The places that have been most successful have had a very large portion of their population doing their part.
1). That’s not true at all. There are very few jobs that require close contact with a lot of people. Those individuals could wear a face shield and N95. And those people are in the same boat lockdown or no lockdown. What’s the alternative? 50% are high risk? How are recovery numbers under 50 so low? You are VASTLY overestimating the risk involved. The highest risk group is the elderly. Most don’t work. The next is obese individuals with Co morbidities. That’s nowhere near 50%.
2) the point is that you caused significant harm to well over half the population, when targeted measures could have impacted less than 5% of the population. And all could have been accomplished voluntarily with no heavy handed government.
3) in what planet did Sweden fail? Because they had a couple hundred more deaths?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
CONS: Most of America is obese and that's the REAL problem!
ALSO CONS: BMI is a garbage stat and most people are not obese!
cdc itself says that BMI is not a good indicator of overall health of an individual. Every bodybuilder would classify as obese.
if everyone who is 5-9 and 200 pounds were at high risk of complications from covid, morbidity stats would look a lot different.
the US is fat, and there are a lot of truly obese people. Don’t need BMI stats, walk around in public. 50% of the population? Nah.
Regardless. Your lack of self control is your problem, not mine.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,725
Reaction score
1,924
Points
113
If we had done nothing, our total deaths would be closer to 5M than 500k. Untold higher numbers of cases leading to long haul complications, hospitalizations, and impossible to account for costs to society. Far higher than the costs of the mitigation efforts.

I'm glad that your personal freedom was sacrificed, to save those lives. Some businesses were lost, but I'm also glad they were sacrificed, to save those lives.

Surely you have a reasonable study to reflect this? At least a third of the population, maybe more, have already been infected despite limitations that only affected some commercial businesses and civic parks and school activities. There were no enforced restrictions on non-commercial activities.

Please explain how we get to 5M deaths Stefan Gildemeister.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,725
Reaction score
1,924
Points
113
Which experts have said "is a pretty big coincidence to hand wave away". None, that's you trying to speak for them.

Peter Daszak, Kristian Andersen, and the Chinese. Nobody else I’m aware of is defending Peter Daszak, Kristian Andersen, and the Chinese.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
23,617
Reaction score
4,966
Points
113
Again....the reason why other countries have opened back up fully and why the U.S. is still lagging behind. Because of the dotard Donalds and the rock biting repubs.


image0.jpg
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,725
Reaction score
1,924
Points
113
CONS: Most of America is obese and that's the REAL problem!
ALSO CONS: BMI is a garbage stat and most people are not obese!

cdc itself says that BMI is not a good indicator of overall health of an individual. Every bodybuilder would classify as obese.
if everyone who is 5-9 and 200 pounds were at high risk of complications from covid, morbidity stats would look a lot different.
the US is fat, and there are a lot of truly obese people. Don’t need BMI stats, walk around in public. 50% of the population? Nah.
Regardless. Your lack of self control is your problem, not mine.

It is a real problem. “Only” 42.4% of adults with some significant racial variation. Obesity kills people slow, Covid kills people fast. Obesity will kill and injure far more people via associaction with heart attack, stroke, Type 2 diabetes, certain cancers than SARS-COV2 via associated pneumonia, sepsis, stroke ever will (I hope). Oh yeah, obesity also makes one more susceptible to early exit with COVID-19. It’s bad. Public health should be talking about this a lot more. I’m not sure why it’s become taboo.

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
It is a real problem. “Only” 42.4% of adults with some significant racial variation. Obesity kills people slow, Covid kills people fast. Obesity will kill and injure far more people via associaction with heart attack, stroke, Type 2 diabetes, certain cancers than SARS-COV2 via associated pneumonia, sepsis, stroke ever will (I hope). Oh yeah, obesity also makes one more susceptible to early exit with COVID-19. It’s bad. Public health should be talking about this a lot more. I’m not sure why it’s become taboo.

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
I can answer. It’s become another victim class.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,725
Reaction score
1,924
Points
113
I can answer. It’s become another victim class.

This seems to be the case. I’m sympathetic to the availability of cheap (and occasionally delicious) fast food and snacks making self-control difficult, lack of recreational opportunities in say, high crime areas where it’s not safe to be out after dusk (or any part of the day) or in a crowded favela. But let’s be very honest: portion control, developing good habits of physical activity and exercise at a young age, and eg, eating for eggs instead of donuts for breakfast can make a difference. Little things add up. Like with most things these days there is a tendency to look for outsiders to blame for choices and outcomes, rather than introspection. I‘ve given up taking ownership for others decisions to protect my mental health.

Earlier I alluded to taxes on corn rather than subsidies only half tongue in cheek. Incentives and disincentives really work to some degree. Even economists have figured this out.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,371
Reaction score
3,127
Points
113
1). That’s not true at all. There are very few jobs that require close contact with a lot of people. Those individuals could wear a face shield and N95. And those people are in the same boat lockdown or no lockdown. What’s the alternative? 50% are high risk? How are recovery numbers under 50 so low? You are VASTLY overestimating the risk involved. The highest risk group is the elderly. Most don’t work. The next is obese individuals with Co morbidities. That’s nowhere near 50%.
2) the point is that you caused significant harm to well over half the population, when targeted measures could have impacted less than 5% of the population. And all could have been accomplished voluntarily with no heavy handed government.
3) in what planet did Sweden fail? Because they had a couple hundred more deaths?
This whole conversation started because someone posted a stat that 80% of the hospitalizations were of people overweight or obese. Even if we eliminate the overweight group, obese people make up over 40% of adults. So would it not be reasonable to say those 40+% are at an increased chance of being hospitalized? Increased chance doesn’t mean they will all be hospitalized. I don’t know where you get 5% from when over 16% of the population is over 65.

I brought up Sweden because they pretty much did what you’re saying we should have done and failed to protect the vulnerable. They’ve gone away from it because it didn’t work and currently have some pretty strict restrictions in place.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,956
Reaction score
2,172
Points
113
Virtually every one that can’t be done from home requires close contact with co-workers and/or customers and clients. So for the higher risk people (50+% of the population) to minimize their risk, they’d have to stay home, not work and not help the economy in any way.

We’ve never come close to canceling all jobs even during the initial lockdown. I’ve argued against completely closing restaurants, gyms, schools etc since the first wave. Places like CA went overboard for too long.

Once again though, it’s not a small subset of people. A small group gets very sick but we can’t pinpoint exactly who’s going to get very sick or die. Two people that are the same age and have similar health may have two different reactions to the virus. The group of people with a greater chance of getting very sick or dying is pretty large and represents a big percentage of the working population.

We can but it would mean a very large percentage of people to stop working because, again, that’s a lot of people.

Of course that helps but if others around them aren’t doing the same things, then it won’t be as successful. You can decrease your chances of getting in a car accident by doing the right things but if everyone around is driving recklessly your chances of getting in an accident is still elevated.

History has shown that it takes everyone to tackle a pandemic. There’s evidence of it now. Sweden and others that tried the approach you’re talking about have failed. The places that have been most successful have had a very large portion of their population doing their part.
excellent post!
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,615
Reaction score
4,239
Points
113
cdc itself says that BMI is not a good indicator of overall health of an individual. Every bodybuilder would classify as obese.
if everyone who is 5-9 and 200 pounds were at high risk of complications from covid, morbidity stats would look a lot different.
the US is fat, and there are a lot of truly obese people. Don’t need BMI stats, walk around in public. 50% of the population? Nah.
Regardless. Your lack of self control is your problem, not mine.

Section2 from the top rope on GopherWeatherGuy's pet theory!
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
3,809
Reaction score
2,656
Points
113
FYI

Maybe this will push to 1000 pages -

Most Mutated Covid-19 Variant Yet Found in Tanzania Travelers​


The most mutated variant of the coronavirus yet was found in travelers from Tanzania, prompting scientists to call for greater monitoring in a country that has largely ignored the pandemic.

A report submitted to the World Health Organization and regional bodies shows the strain has 10 more mutations than found on any other version, according to Tulio de Oliveira, director of Krisp, a scientific institute that carries out genetic testing for 10 African nations. Krisp, which discovered a new strain in South Africa last year that propelled a resurgence of infections in the country, found the new variant in travelers arriving in Angola from Tanzania.

“It is potentially of interest,” de Oliveira said in an interview on Friday.

Variants of the coronavirus have caused concern globally as, for instance, the one first identified in South Africa known as 501Y.V2 has proven more infectious and able to more easily evade some vaccines. Still, no work has been done yet on the version found in three Tanzanian travelers to ascertain whether it is more infectious or severe than other strains.

The newly discovered version will be grown at laboratories at Krisp and an attempt will be made to ascertain how easily it evades antibodies, de Oliveira said. The variant comes from a lineage of the virus first identified in China, whereas many others trace their roots to Europe.

Under recently decesased President John Magufuli, Tanzania stopped releasing data on coronavirus infections and opened up the economy including the resort island of Zanzibar, which attracts international tourists. Magufuli’s stance attracted criticism from neighbors and the WHO as anecdotal evidence suggested many people in the country have contracted the disease.

His successor, Samia Suluhu Hassan, has yet to indicate whether she will change his policies.

“This may be a big wake up call to Tanzania,” de Oliveira said.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
13,615
Reaction score
4,239
Points
113
FYI

Maybe this will push to 1000 pages -

Most Mutated Covid-19 Variant Yet Found in Tanzania Travelers​


The most mutated variant of the coronavirus yet was found in travelers from Tanzania, prompting scientists to call for greater monitoring in a country that has largely ignored the pandemic.

A report submitted to the World Health Organization and regional bodies shows the strain has 10 more mutations than found on any other version, according to Tulio de Oliveira, director of Krisp, a scientific institute that carries out genetic testing for 10 African nations. Krisp, which discovered a new strain in South Africa last year that propelled a resurgence of infections in the country, found the new variant in travelers arriving in Angola from Tanzania.

“It is potentially of interest,” de Oliveira said in an interview on Friday.

Variants of the coronavirus have caused concern globally as, for instance, the one first identified in South Africa known as 501Y.V2 has proven more infectious and able to more easily evade some vaccines. Still, no work has been done yet on the version found in three Tanzanian travelers to ascertain whether it is more infectious or severe than other strains.

The newly discovered version will be grown at laboratories at Krisp and an attempt will be made to ascertain how easily it evades antibodies, de Oliveira said. The variant comes from a lineage of the virus first identified in China, whereas many others trace their roots to Europe.

Under recently decesased President John Magufuli, Tanzania stopped releasing data on coronavirus infections and opened up the economy including the resort island of Zanzibar, which attracts international tourists. Magufuli’s stance attracted criticism from neighbors and the WHO as anecdotal evidence suggested many people in the country have contracted the disease.

His successor, Samia Suluhu Hassan, has yet to indicate whether she will change his policies.

“This may be a big wake up call to Tanzania,” de Oliveira said.

It has been suggested that the non Berenson-lovers among us will get a COVID vaccine every year like we do with influenza.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,483
Reaction score
2,965
Points
113
This whole conversation started because someone posted a stat that 80% of the hospitalizations were of people overweight or obese. Even if we eliminate the overweight group, obese people make up over 40% of adults. So would it not be reasonable to say those 40+% are at an increased chance of being hospitalized? Increased chance doesn’t mean they will all be hospitalized. I don’t know where you get 5% from when over 16% of the population is over 65.

I brought up Sweden because they pretty much did what you’re saying we should have done and failed to protect the vulnerable. They’ve gone away from it because it didn’t work and currently have some pretty strict restrictions in place.
We are talking about workers who have close contact with lots of people by virtue of their job. Can’t be a lot of 65+ in that group.
I wish we had better data on hospitalizations. If the hospitalized group averaged 400 pounds vs averaging 200 pounds, I think we’d have a better idea of the “obese” risk factors.
it is not going to be a hard cutoff with no hospitalizations for a certain group. But that’s why good info about who is at risk and what measures individuals can and should take relative to their risk profile would have been helpful. Public health gets an F.
sweden to my knowledge didn’t do a great job with nursing homes. Outside that, their results don’t look much different than anywhere else. There is no correlation to lockdowns and mask mandates and success in controlling the virus.
 
Top Bottom